1. Field of the Invention
The subject invention is generally related to mace dispensers for use by the general consumer and is specifically directed to a chemical irritant dispenser which is designed to be readily located and oriented for use during a crisis situation, while minimizing the likelihood of misuse.
2. Discussion of the Prior Art
Chemical irritant dispensers are well known. Typically, the dispensers contain an aerosol pepper spray or other irritant, such as by way of example, the MACE brand of chemical irritant spray manufactured by MSI. Initially, such dispensers were designed for official use by law enforcement personnel and later by certain individuals as on the job protection, such as by way of example, postal service workers, delivery men and the like. Because the dispensers were used by selected personnel, proper training minimized the chances for misuse and the specific dispensers did not necessarily take into account the ease of use and of storage. Many such dispensers are carried in holsters worn on the belt of the uniform of the wearer. An example of such a holster is shown and described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,588,116, entitled: "Holster for a Chemical Tear Gas Projector", issued to A. Litman of May 13, 1986.
Typically, prior art dispensers are fabricated from a standard aerosol canister, and are held in a vertical position when deployed, much like a handheld aerosol paint dispenser. As these dispensers gained acceptance in the general population, certain difficulties began to surface. For example, the standard aerosol canister must be properly aimed or it is possible to spray oneself with the contents. The actuator button generally includes an arrow for indicating the direction of spray. While satisfactory in many applications, the chemical irritant dispensers are typically used under stress and the requirement for conscientious aiming is a significant drawback. A number of devices have been developed to deal with this issue, see for example U.S. Pat. No. 3,602,399, entitled: "Non-Lethal Weapon Dispenser", issued to A. Litman on Aug. 31, 1971. None of these devices has met with widespread acceptance. This is primarily due to the fact that location, aiming and firing require a concentrated thought process which eliminates the element of surprise and the ability to quickly act when under duress.
More recently, this has been dealt with by attempting to incorporate the irritant dispenser in a common implement such as a key chain or the like. Examples of such devices are shown is U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,044,922, entitled: "Protective Device", issued to L. Bordelon on Aug. 30, 1977, and 4,449,474, entitled: "Personal Security Device", issued to J. Andersson et al on Feb. 10, 1987. While such devices offer improvement over other configurations of such dispensers, they do not deal with two important issues. First, it is still necessary that the device be conscientiously aimed prior to using. Secondly, while common to provide a safety lock, it is not possible to unlatch the safety lock while holding the dispenser in an at ready position, requiring two separate actions to deploy the irritant. In order to expedite use, the lock is often left unlatched, creating a hazard of accidental release of the contents of the canister. Further, the key ring dispensers of the prior art are generally bulky and cumbersome, taking up substantial space in a purse, and not conducive to being carried on the person because of the bulky, unsightly appearance. In addition, the dispensers of the prior art still require vertical positioning during use.
There are also prior art devices adapted for carrying a typical dispenser in a holder which has additional functions such as a key ring or the like. See, for example, Caruso U.S. Pat. No. 4,220,263 which discloses a holder or a pouch for a dispenser, with a closed end of the pouch formed to support a key ring. A flexible flap closes the pouch and may be depressed to activate the dispenser. As with many prior art dispensers and holders, the Caruso device does not incorporate an adequate safety system for minimizing either accidental release or improper aiming. In addition, the key ring of Caruso is not a functional feature of the design, neither in assisting in the orientation of the canister nor as part of the protective system incorporated in the design.
Yet another disadvantage of the prior art devices is the requirement that the entire unit be replaced once the supply of chemical is exhausted. This greatly increases the cost of replacement, with the resulting reduction in acceptability to the general population.
Therefore, there remains a need for a chemical irritant dispenser which is easy to carry and conceal as part of a commonly carried implement, while being simple to use in a spontaneous manner in a crisis. It is also desirable to provide an irritant dispenser which is easy to stow with a safety lock engaged and latched, wherein the dispenser can be retrieved for use and rapidly unlatched to minimize any time delay in use.